Why are traditionalist forums so appalling?

[brotherhrolf]

The reality was that the changes were staggeringly sudden across a wide front from big earth shaking changes to little things like the brothers and sisters abandoning their habits in favor of no habits or more modern habits. Or like Benediction. Benediction was common before Vatican II. At my cathedral parish, I am lucky to participate in Benediction twice a year at best. Many have remarked that they have never seen Benediction or a Corpus Christi procession on a city street.

I don’t believe that it is necessary for anyone to be rude or to cause scandal by their words. But rudeness exists on both sides of the equation. Ignorance (and by that I mean a lack of knowledge) exists on both sides of the equation too. I had no idea the NO could be said in Latin until I saw it on EWTN. I am still reading the Council documents because quite frankly the laity was simply told what was going to happen from the pulpit. None of it was discussed in religion class in my junior and senior year (except for Humanae Vitae). There are folks on these fora who cite chapter and verse of all sorts of church documents. I appreciate their instruction.

I try very hard not to sound judgmental and I often fail miserably when it comes to things involving music and chant. But I am trying to remember little things like the smell of beeswax candles and being able to light a candle for the repose of the soul of my departed relatives…or seeing people make the sign of the cross when the public bus passes in front of a church.

I would like to point out something to Padraig. You stated that you often feel like this is ancient history and that you might as well be reading about Vatican 1. People reminiscing is valid oral history. I wasn’t alive for WWII but my parents were. There are fewer and fewer people alive from my parents’ generation every day and I am happy to announce that the awesome WWII museum in New Orleans is collecting those oral histories before my parents’ generation dies.

My generation is now beginning to pass away. We were not all hippies. We didn’t all smoke pot or listen to Jimmi Hendrix or dodge the draft. The purpose of oral history is to present a counter-balance which is highly important if all you are going to do is be persuaded by popular media and popular conceptions. We threw the baby out with the bath water after Vatican II and, after being spat upon for being in uniform during the Vietnam war years, I made it my life’s pledge to see that our military veterans were treated with honor. Those who ignore the past are destined to repeat it.

 

[PadraigPearce]

Brotherhrolf, thanks for putting so much thought into your replies.I didn’t mean to diminish them by referring to the council as ancient history. It’s really fascinating to me to hear from people who were affected by the changes. I grew up nominally Catholic and I never realized there was anything more to the faith than guitars and syrupy homilies about how Jesus loves you exactly as you are. Ironically, I learned more about the Catholic faith at the Anglican church my dad started taking me to because they had a better choir. Most of what I’ve learned about the Church has been through reading, but it’s interesting to hear from people who were affected so dramatically by the changes.

 

[Lormar]

BrotherHRolf, exceedingly well said.

These young people have no idea what it was like for those of us who lived through the sixties. Within ten years, both the world and the Church did a complete flip-flop. It was not an easy time for many people.

Original sin abounds.

 

[Chiltepin]

These young people have no idea what it was like .

and they LOVE hearing that

 

[Chiltepin]

These young people have no idea what it was like for those of us who lived through the sixties.

They LOVE to hear that.

I’ll lazily quote myself, but I doubt anyone cares

A shift towards traditionalism is possible. The youth grow tired of the way faith is being packaged and marketed to them in silly ways. They could easily seek something more substantial. I think they would be greatly discouraged if all they get is people telling them they just don’t understand how bad things have gotten.

I am a relatively young person(23). I wear a veil to Mass, no matter what sort of Mass. That is out of the ordinary where I live but I rarely get funny looks or have anyone say anything. The only people that have ever reacted negatively to my doing this is some older traditionalists who see it and zero in on me as a sympathetic ear for their gripings. While I listen to such unpleasant lectures, it inevitably includes lines such as “You couldn’t possibly understand, I was alive when…” I see the irreverance at some churches, I know what a Tridentine Mass is like. Maybe as is suggested I couldn’t possibly understand. If I can’t understand, what good will it do to tell me so.

Now the social history aspect, I can appreciate. I don’t want you to think I am uninterested in or don’t care about what went on. Its just that certain story telling styles are… offputting.

 

[Lormar]

Yes, young lady, tell me more about “offputting” styles.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Originally Posted by Chiltepin 
A shift towards traditionalism is possible. The youth grow tired of the way faith is being packaged and marketed to them in silly ways. They could easily seek something more substantial……

Our local Legion of Mary is currently working on getting the Catechism back into Catholic schools. This, of course, is what the Vatican has recommended in its official documents, but it is being disregarded with impunity. The response of bishops (who should be overseeing the curriculum and ensuring its implementation) ranges from active opposition to surprise expressed that the catechism is not being taught! After all these decades! There is nothing for it but to work patiently at the re-building of the Catholic Edifice. And we must, alas, be content with limited successes. I mention the above partly to ask for your prayers for the success of the project – and to recommend joining such groups as the Legion of Mary.

I am a relatively young person(23). I wear a veil to Mass, no matter what sort of Mass. That is out of the ordinary where I live but I rarely get funny looks or have anyone say anything.

One of my daughters went for a year to a “Crammer College” as they call them here. She had been homeschooled for some years but needed to prepare for the Leaving Cert. exams [age 17 - 19], best done in a “mainstream” school. She wore a full-length skirt from day one, the only pupil in the college to do so. (Later two or three experimented with this). She made the interesting discovery that all the boys opened doors for her & generally treated her like a lady, where they treated the other girls disrespectfully. (The other side of the coin – the other girls wouldn’t talk to her, on the whole). I just mention it. A young lady like yourself will want to weigh these things up. You may have already decided to join this fight back for femininity!

The only people that have ever reacted negatively to my doing this is some older traditionalists who see it and zero in on me as a sympathetic ear for their gripings. While I listen to such unpleasant lectures, it inevitably includes lines such as “You couldn’t possibly understand, I was alive when…” I see the irreverance at some churches, I know what a Tridentine Mass is like. Maybe as is suggested I couldn’t possibly understand. If I can’t understand, what good will it do to tell me so? … Now the social history aspect, I can appreciate. I don’t want you to think I am uninterested in or don’t care about what went on. Its just that certain story telling styles are… offputting.

An age-old problem, Chiltepin. You will be surprised how quickly you too will have clear memories and indelible perceptions that are simply a total blank to those younger than yourself. It can be frustrationg, not in a selfish way, but that you are sorry your own hard-won experiences are so unavailable to them. A wise parent (or older person) knows how counter-productive it is to tell young people “You don’t know how lucky you are; in my day we only … (etc etc)" … but unfortunately, not all older people have that wisdom.

 

[numealinesimpet]

No, I’m not being sarcastic. I am serious.
…
This may sound terribly naive, but for me the Mass is all about a community gathering together celebrating the mystery of the Eucharist. Everything else is just human construct and not worth the emotional tirades on this forum, from either side.

I did have that view during the early Seventies. But by the Eighties I noticed how many committed Catholic parents were seeing their children dropping away from the Faith, and they didn’t know why. I came to the conclusion that the New Liturgy, new Catechesis, New Everything was doing nothing so crude as officially denying aspects of the Faith, it was just quietly dropping them. And an interesting thing was happening. The Oldies did not notice the omissions, while the Newbies never heard them in the first place. I think perhaps the NO, even when done reverently, presupposes a well-formed Faith. Yet it does not transmit this Faith in its integrity. Even this would not be so bad if it were being given elsewhere, but the “New Catechetical Programs” are often even worse than the liturgy.

To give your own example:
“The mystery of the Eucharist”.
After the Consecration, the congregation are invited to proclaim “The Mystery of Faith”. (NB the Latin, which has no word for ‘the’ should probably have been “A Mystery of Faith”.) A choice of four responses is given, none of which refer to the Mystery that has just been enacted. Why not? (In Ireland, in 1969 at least the bishops had enough sense of the Faith to successfully get, by indult, a fifth response: “My Lord and my God”.)
How many post-Vatican II children were taught what this Mystery actually is – even though it had been laid down for all time at the Council of Chalcedon in 451AD? The school books – and parish programmes – the ones I have seen anyway – refer to anything and everything except what the Bread and Wine after the Consecration actually is.

The next step was for the bishops to decide: since the children do not understand the Mystery, we must raise the Age of Receiving from 7 to 8 (when they still haven’t ben taught it). It was round about then that I had studied the case enough to realise that the SSPX were being unjustly accused of schism, and I prepared my own children – at age 7 – to Receive Our Blessed Lord while they were still innocent, as Pope S. Pius X had commanded.

Those who are unconcerned about the New Order, and whose children are keeping the Faith – keep it up! If, however, all is not well & you don’t know why, take a careful look at the Traditional way. But I warn you, you must really mean it. The odd bob towards Latin or incense, while maintaining the Spirit of the World, will be a waste of time.

 

[CradleCath]

The reality was that the changes were staggeringly sudden across a wide front from big earth shaking changes to little things like the brothers and sisters abandoning their habits in favor of no habits or more modern habits. Or like Benediction. Benediction was common before Vatican II. At my cathedral parish, I am lucky to participate in Benediction twice a year at best. Many have remarked that they have never seen Benediction or a Corpus Christi procession on a city street.

I don’t believe that it is necessary for anyone to be rude or to cause scandal by their words. But rudeness exists on both sides of the equation. Ignorance (and by that I mean a lack of knowledge) exists on both sides of the equation too. I had no idea the NO could be said in Latin until I saw it on EWTN. I am still reading the Council documents because quite frankly the laity was simply told what was going to happen from the pulpit. None of it was discussed in religion class in my junior and senior year (except for Humanae Vitae). There are folks on these fora who cite chapter and verse of all sorts of church documents. I appreciate their instruction.

I try very hard not to sound judgmental and I often fail miserably when it comes to things involving music and chant. But I am trying to remember little things like the smell of beeswax candles and being able to light a candle for the repose of the soul of my departed relatives…or seeing people make the sign of the cross when the public bus passes in front of a church.

I would like to point out something to Padraig. You stated that you often feel like this is ancient history and that you might as well be reading about Vatican 1. People reminiscing is valid oral history. I wasn’t alive for WWII but my parents were. There are fewer and fewer people alive from my parents’ generation every day and I am happy to announce that the awesome WWII museum in New Orleans is collecting those oral histories before my parents’ generation dies.

My generation is now beginning to pass away. We were not all hippies. We didn’t all smoke pot or listen to Jimmi Hendrix or dodge the draft. The purpose of oral history is to present a counter-balance which is highly important if all you are going to do is be persuaded by popular media and popular conceptions. We threw the baby out with the bath water after Vatican II and, after being spat upon for being in uniform during the Vietnam war years, I made it my life’s pledge to see that our military veterans were treated with honor. Those who ignore the past are destined to repeat it.

ANOTHER excellent post.

 

[brotherhrolf]

My two sons are 28 and 25. They grew up rolling their eyes and have named my “story telling” as “Daddy mode”. I must have done something right for the amount of history and love of history they have retained is very gratifying to me.

I have a deep and abiding love of history and culture. This is not uncommon in the southern part of the United States. By education I am an anthropologist and historian. “Story telling” is in my blood. I feel sorry for those of you who simply “blow-off” history and culture as being irrelevant. My family retains customs from 19th century Ireland. My wife’s family retains customs from 17th century France. Neither is mere “social history” but part and parcel of “who we are”.

We simply cannot jettison our history and culture as Latin Catholics. When I was an undergrad, an Eastern Orthodox classmate invited all of us Latin types to attend the Great Liturgy for Holy Saturday at her church and the traditional Paschal meal with her family after the Divine Liturgy. This was in spring of 1976. I cried during their liturgy because I realized all that we Latin Catholics had lost in under 10 years.

So, if my “story telling” is off putting, I am sorry. We don’t need to be nasty in our approach but you need to hear our story.

 

[TracyJ]

They LOVE to hear that.

I’ll lazily quote myself, but I doubt anyone cares

Now the social history aspect, I can appreciate. I don’t want you to think I am uninterested in or don’t care about what went on. Its just that certain story telling styles are… offputting.

Are you talking about their writing style, or the ideas that are expressed within them.
I tried to read some Deepak Chopra books and, while I think that he may have some good
ideas, his writing style was offputting to me.
But then again, there are Catholic writers that do the same thing.

 

[redrosetea]

I sometimes look at Angelqueen forum, and another one called Fisheaters, and I’ve learned some interesting info there about church history, liturgy etc. There seem to be some genuinely friendly people on those forums, but I’ve decided I can’t look at them anymore because a lot of people on them are downright mean and nasty. There’s blatant anti semitism, derogatory comments about people who go to the ordinary form of the mass and horrible comments about Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I’ve been to an FSSP parish and found the people there quite lovely and welcoming, so why do trad forums seem to attract such a nasty caliber of people? I guess it’s just like any other internet forum, where you get some nutjobs, but it seems a lot more common on trad forums, with the exception of this one.

I agree and they do give some good information at times…but they don’t have a spirit of charity so it ruins it for me

 

[TracyJ]

My two sons are 28 and 25. They grew up rolling their eyes and have named my “story telling” as “Daddy mode”. I must have done something right for the amount of history and love of history they have retained is very gratifying to me.

I have a deep and abiding love of history and culture. This is not uncommon in the southern part of the United States. By education I am an anthropologist and historian. “Story telling” is in my blood. I feel sorry for those of you who simply “blow-off” history and culture as being irrelevant. My family retains customs from 19th century Ireland. My wife’s family retains customs from 17th century France. Neither is mere “social history” but part and parcel of “who we are”.

We simply cannot jettison our history and culture as Latin Catholics. When I was an undergrad, an Eastern Orthodox classmate invited all of us Latin types to attend the Great Liturgy for Holy Saturday at her church and the traditional Paschal meal with her family after the Divine Liturgy. This was in spring of 1976. I cried during their liturgy because I realized all that we Latin Catholics had lost in under 10 years.

So, if my “story telling” is off putting, I am sorry. We don’t need to be nasty in our approach but you need to hear our story.

So far I’ve really enjoyed your posts, though once when I said I enjoyed the Mass on
this forum certain posters became hostile and said the Mass wasn’t THERE to enjoy!
So please don’t take offense.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Originally Posted by iluvburpees *
There have been changes in the Mass over the centuries, but they were always slow, gradual changes, which truly were for the good of the Church. What is most appalling about the changes Bugnini introduced is the fact that he treated the Mass as though it were just a lump of clay to shape in any way he wished. The worst example of this was the change of the Canon. Tradition and Pope Benedict XIV tell us that Pope St. Gregory the Great was the last of the popes to change the Canon in any way. While there could have been an insignificant word or two added since his time, this is unimportant; what really matters is that there was a tradition of over a thousand years in the Church of keeping the Canon untouched and unchanged. Cardinal Gasquet reaffirms this:
“Our present detailed knowledge of this most sacred part of the Mass goes back certainly 1300 years. And with the exception of one short clause added by St. Gregory it has remained practically unchanged to the present day. This fact, that it has so remained unaltered during thirteen centuries, is the most speaking witness of the veneration with which it has always been regarded and of the scruple which has always been felt at touching so sacred a heritage, coming to us from unknown antiquity*.”

It was an iron rule from at least the 7th to the 20th centuries that things could be added to the liturgy (with due reflection), but never taken away,
The only exception was the Council of Trent. The Canon of the Mass especially had been thought of as sacrosanct since the Ninth century. After that, particular dioceses had added extra bits in between the words of the Traditional text. The creative urge, innate in us as beings in the Image of God the Creator, was struggling to accomodate an equally strong impulse to leave the sacred text unaltered. By the 16th century, not only was this getting out of hand, but the Protestants were deliberately inserting hertical ideas into the Liturgy. The Council of Trent abolished all innovations more recent than 200 years (ie before the Protestant Rebellion), while affirming the validity of any authorised Rites before that date (note the charity and justice of this decree: there was no Blanket Abolition such as happened in 1969). Meanwhile a version of the Rite as practised in Rome, pruned of late-mediaeval addenda, but incorporating the best from all over Europe, was defined as the “Default Liturgy”. It was protected, in the most beautiful language, from any further tampering, and every priest was personally authorised to offer the Mass in this manner, exempt from any penalty or ‘scruple of conscience’, until the End of Time. This of course was – & is – the Tridentine or Traditional Latin Rite.

Additionally, the Council of Trent stated that the Canon has no error and that it “contains nothing that does not savor strongly of holiness and piety and nothing that does not raise to God the minds of those who offer the Sacrifice.” It is so sacred and perfect that Trent anathematized anyone who would claim that it contains error or would wish to do away with it. With these ideas in mind, the point is clear: the Canon of the Mass is such a holy and perfect thing that to change it in any way whatsoever would demand a very serious reason. And if there are to be any changes, they should be almost imperceptible, as the changes in the Canon over the centuries have been. Even more importantly, any changes must not give rise to doctrinal problems or ambiguity. Unfortunately, these two provisions were not observed in the forming of the New Mass, and there instead resulted unacceptably drastic and consequential changes.

To this, seagal replied:

Thank you for that, iluvburpees. Forgive my ignorance, but if all that’s true (which I don’t doubt), then what happened at the 2nd vatican council? Why the sweeping changes then? Maybe someone can provide a link as to the why’s?

Before we tackle that issue, let me quote from the famous “Ottaviani Intervention”, compiled by some of the most senior churchmen of their day and sent in anguish to Pope Paul VI:–
[continued…]

 

[numealinesimpet]

[continued…]

ALFREDO CARDINAL OTTAVIANI
ANTONIO CARDINAL BACCI

TO HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI

COMMONLY CALLED “THE OTTAVIANI INTERVENTION”

[On September 25, 1969, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, Prefect-Emeritus of
the Sacred Congregation for the Faith, sent a letter to Pope Paul VI.
Accompanying the letter was a theological Study of the New Order of the
Mass (Novus Ordo Missae), written by a group of Roman theologians.
Cardinal Ottaviani’s letter was a plea to His Holiness “not to deprive
us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful
integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V, so highly praised by
Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic
world.” It was apparently in response to the Ottaviani Intervention
that Pope Paul subsequently ordered a delay of two years in the deadline
for mandatory implementation of the new Ordo.

[Note that the Cardinal is speaking here of the defects not of any
vernacular translation, but of the original Latin draft, that is, the
New Mass in its best, in its purest form.]
Rome
25 September 1969

Most Holy Father:

Having carefully examined and presented for the scrutiny of

others the New Order of Mass prepared by the experts of the Committee
for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, and
after lengthy prayer and reflection, we feel obliged before God and Your
Holiness to set forth the following considerations:

1. The accompanying Critical Study is the work of a select group of
   bishops, theologians, liturgists, and pastors of souls. Despite its
   brevity, the study shows quite clearly that the Novus Ordo
   Missae–considering the new elements widely susceptible to widely
   different interpretations which are implied or taken for
   granted–represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking
   departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in
   Session 22 of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the rite
   definitively fixed at that time erected an insurmountable barrier
   against any heresy which might attack the integrity of the Mystery.
2. The pastoral reasons put forth to justify such a grave break, even
   if such reasons could still hold good in the face of doctrinal
   considerations, do not seem sufficient. The innovations in the Novus
   Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor
   place–if it subsists at all–could well turn into a certainty the
   suspicion, already prevalent, alas in many circles, that truths which
   have always been believed by the Christian people can be changed or
   ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which
   the Catholic faith is bound forever. The recent reforms have amply
   demonstrated that new changes in the liturgy could not be made without
   leading to complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful, who
   already show signs of restiveness and an indubitable lessening of their
   faith. Among the best of the clergy, the result is an agonizing crisis
   of conscience, numberless instances of which come to us daily.
3. We are certain that these considerations, prompted by what we hear
   from the living voice of shepherds and the flock, cannot but find an
   echo in the heart of Your Holiness, always so profoundly solicitous for
   the spiritual needs of the children of the Church. The subjects for
   whose benefit a law is made have always had the right, nay the duty, to
   ask the legislator to abrogate the law, should it prove to be harmful.
   
   At a time, therefore, when the purity of the faith and the unity
   of the Church suffer cruel lacerations and still greater peril, daily
   and sorrowfully echoed in the words of You, our common Father, we most
   earnestly beseech Your Holiness not to deprive us of the possibility of
   continuing to have recourse to the integral and fruitful Missal of St.
   Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness, and so deeply venerated by
   the whole Catholic world.

A. Card. Ottaviani
A. Card. Bacci

 

[numealinesimpet]

Now, chris molter, I would like to respond to your post:–

You may be surprised, but NOWHERE in the documents of Vatican II can you find anything suggesting “no more Latin”, “no more communion rail”, etc. Quite the opposite, actually. Vatican II emphasized Latin having “pride of place” in the liturgy as well as chant.
… My recommendation would be to start with the actual documents of the Council itself, especially **Sacrosanctum Consilium. **

I have the yellowed, dog-eared edition of the Words of Vatican II (see posting #32 on this thread), that I highlighted with my dear wife in 1983, in front of me as I type.
I am very sorry, but the documents of Vatican II are much less watertight than meets the eye.

To give your own example:

What **Sacrosanctum Consilium. ** Chapter 4, Par 47 actually says is

…the use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law,

is to be preserved… … without saying what particular law may be enacted, or may not be enacted. Dear friends, this was a totally blank cheque! We would not have believed in 1963 that it would have been taken that way, but we soon found out, didn’t we? And what Chapter 4, par 50(a) actually says is,

Gregorian chant, as proper to the Roman Liturgy, should be given pride of place, ***other things being equal. ***

without saying what ‘other things’ must be equal, or ‘how equal’. A gigantic loophole!

Its melodies, contained in the ‘typical editions’, should be used, *** to the extent that this is possible. ***

without saying what ‘makes it possible’. An enthusiastic parish priest? Six good cantors? Or five? Or thirty? Another gigantic loophole!

(b) It is also desirable that an edition be prepared containing simpler melodies,*** for use in smaller churches.*** How small? Ordinary parish churches?

(c) Other musical settings … should be held in honor, encouraged and used *** as the occasion demands. ***

What occasions? Another gigantic loophole!

I’m still waiting for the REAL Vatican II to be implemented 

Sadly, this will never be … because it is quite impossible to tie down the words to something that actually * can * be implemented.

Now, how & why did all this happen? That’s for further consideration.

 

[CradleCath]

My two sons are 28 and 25. They grew up rolling their eyes and have named my “story telling” as “Daddy mode”. I must have done something right for the amount of history and love of history they have retained is very gratifying to me.

I have a deep and abiding love of history and culture. This is not uncommon in the southern part of the United States. By education I am an anthropologist and historian. “Story telling” is in my blood. I feel sorry for those of you who simply “blow-off” history and culture as being irrelevant. My family retains customs from 19th century Ireland. My wife’s family retains customs from 17th century France. ** Neither is mere “social history” but part and parcel of “who we are”.**We simply cannot jettison our history and culture as Latin Catholics. When I was an undergrad, an Eastern Orthodox classmate invited all of us Latin types to attend the Great Liturgy for Holy Saturday at her church and the traditional Paschal meal with her family after the Divine Liturgy. This was in spring of 1976. I cried during their liturgy because I realized all that we Latin Catholics had lost in under 10 years.

So, if my “story telling” is off putting, I am sorry. We don’t need to be nasty in our approach but you need to hear our story.

Your story-telling style is wonderful. I do believe that a time will come in each of our lives, if it hasn’t already arrived…when we’ll desparately **need **to know who we are & where we came from. It has always given me strength to go on during certain periods of my life…to look back upon my ancestors, their strengths, their faith.

I’m reminded of the HUGE part that our Catholicism played in the lives of both my husband & myself. I remember something that touched me deeply a few years back. It happened at the rosary held the day after my Father-in-Law’s death. My Father-in-law & mother-in-law had raised 8 children…all are still Catholic. The funeral home was packed when my son & his new girlfriend arrived. The priest who led the rosary started & the 75 people who fit within the room hit their knees…mostly on the floor because their weren’t enough kneelers. They were all related, either by blood or marriage & they took out old, finger-worn beads & started the rosary & the prayers for the dead. I don’t know if the people outside knelt…but I do know they followed the prayers. My son, now 34, looked at the new girlfriend, gestured toward the crowd & said…“This is who I am”.

On my own side of the family, the faith & the culture that goes with it, has not been lost, either. The story of it’s progression can be found in a little Catholic cemetary is a town called Fidelity, Ks. The town & the Catholic Church that my Grandfather helped to build is gone, but the cemetary is still being taken care of.

I do not intend for my forefather’s lives to be forgotten. The Angelus Bells called them from the fields at noon, their Guardian Angels protected them during the two world wars they fought in & each one knew the life story of his/her patron saints. Most of their homes had a Holy Water font when you entered & many could tell you who “had a candle goin” in front of the Virgin & why. They did not have the same kind of education that is common today, but they could all say the Pater Noster in Latin & understood the heritage that was their’s by virtue of their catholicism. They knew that the Roman Canon began with the words, “te igitur clementissime Pater,” which translates as “thee, therefore, most merciful Father”. They had their “Church clothes” which were to be removed immediately after Mass & to be worn no where else.

And no! I’ll never forget the look on my Grandfather’s 87 yr. old face when he entered his first “Vatican II” Church… with no statues, the high altar hidden by sheet rock, the Communion rail gone & a priest sitting in the Sanctuary!!! practicing “Blowin in the Wind” on his guitar.

When one of my aunts said that she was thinking of naming her coming child Melvin, if it was a boy. My Grandmother said that she didn’t recall hearing of any saint named Melvin…so, of course, that name was out!!!

Some of you need to know what you’ve lost.

 

[fish90]

Thank God for Pope Benedict XVI.

 

[Aboveallbereal]

Your attitude seems reasonable to me. Just out of curiosity though, **why **should there be more Latin? What purpose does it serve, except to alienate those who don’t understand it? And I’m not sure what EF means.

Quite simply it is more beautiful. To me, and it is only a subjective view Iknow but to me the Latin mass is far more aestheticaly pleasing than the vernacular. I taught myself the pater noster in Latin not to be snob but because it sounds so rooted, so meaningful. It sounds as if one is speaking a language reserved for communing with God.

I accept the vernacular. However I attend the mass in latin when able to nd I think it vastly superior aesthetically. I realise this is a secondary issue but catholicism has never been afraid of the aesthetic.

 

[iluvburpees]

Quite simply it is more beautiful. To me, and it is only a subjective view Iknow but to me the Latin mass is far more aestheticaly pleasing than the vernacular. I taught myself the pater noster in Latin not to be snob but because it sounds so rooted, so meaningful. It sounds as if one is speaking a language reserved for communing with God.

I accept the vernacular. However I attend the mass in latin when able to nd I think it vastly superior aesthetically. I realise this is a secondary issue but catholicism has never been afraid of the aesthetic.

Shall I add that it is a “dead” language, and therefore makes it impossible for liberals to change the meaning in the prayers?